19 July 2011 early edition/transcript/Part 21
Part 21 PHILIP DAVIES: How many times would you speak to Rupert Murdoch when you were chief executive of News International? REBEKAH BROOKS: I would speak to Mr Murdoch and James Murdoch much more regularly since I have become chief executive than I did when I was editor. Q550 DAVIES: Once a day? Twice a day? REBEKAH: James Murdoch and I have offices next to each other, although he has his travel schedule because of his wide responsibilities, and I would talk to Rupert Murdoch quite regularly. Q551 DAVIES: Once a day, twice a day—can you give me any kind of idea? REBEKAH: On average, every other day, but pretty regularly. Q552 DAVIES: You said that everyone at News of the World was going to say that everyone was working hard to get them a job and make sure that they did not lose it, which is perfectly admirable. Why is that not the same for Tom Crone? You said that the reason he left the employment was because his job sort of no longer existed at News of the World, and he was doing that, so if you are busily trying to find a job for everybody at News of the World, why are you not going to find a job for poor old Tom Crone? Why has he got the Spanish archer? REBEKAH: There are some people who did not want a job. In the case of Tom Crone, Tom's title was News International legal manager. It was not, as Mr Sheridan pointed out, just journalists; it was drivers and secretaries—many people to find jobs for at News of the World. In the case of Tom, as I explained, for the last few years he had predominantly worked as the legal manager for News of the World; in fact there are legal teams on all the other newspapers. That was the current situation with Tom. Q553 DAVIES: Can I just ask you about Neville Thurlbeck? Did you know when you were editor of News of the World that he was somebody who was an informer to the police? REBEKAH: No. Q554 DAVIES: You did not know that he was a police informant? REBEKAH: No. Is that true? Q555 DAVIES: Well, it is in the Evening Standard. They have quoted court reports dating back to 2000, when he said himself, after a case: "The police were very impressed about the type of intelligence I was coming up with and that was revealed in court. The judge said it was a substantial volume of information that was extremely useful to police." It says also that sources close to Thurlbeck said that "people right at the top of News International were aware of his role" with the police. REBEKAH: I was not aware that Neville Thurlbeck was a police informant. Q556 DAVIES: So, that comes as a complete shock to you? REBEKAH: You're telling me now, but I am not even sure what it means, particularly. If you're asking me whether members of the press and members of the police force have a symbiotic relationship of exchanging information for the public interest, then they do, but I am not quite sure what the word "police informant" means. Q557 DAVIES: The allegation is that he passed on a substantial volume of information that was extremely useful to Scotland Yard, and in return Mr Thurlbeck received dozens of items of confidential information from the police national computer. That is the allegation. But that is nothing that you would know anything about? REBEKAH: I don't know about that, but most journalists who work as crime editors or crime correspondents have a working relationship with their particular police force. Q558 DAVIES: When our report was published in early 2010, when you were chief executive of News International, there were certain things that we obviously reported. We found that the evidence from the people from News International was wholly unsatisfactory. We referred to the collective amnesia in our report, and we felt it was inconceivable that Clive Goodman was a rogue reporter, as had been passed on to us. We referred to the "for Neville" e-mail in there—all that kind of stuff. When you were chief executive of News International, at the time the report was published, did you read the report that we published? REBEKAH: Yes, I did. I'm not saying that I read every single word, but I read a large majority of it. I particularly read the criticisms that were addressed to the company, and I can only hope that, from the evidence you have heard from us today, you know that we have really stepped up our investigation. Rupert and James Murdoch have been here today, being very open and very honest with you as a Committee. I was very willing to come, despite the fact that there are some legal issues around what I say. I hope that you think that when we saw the civil disclosure in December 2010 we acted swiftly and promptly to deal with it. The police investigation would not be open now—there would not be a new criminal inquiry—if it had not been for the information that News International handed over. I am not saying that we have not made mistakes, but the Metropolitan police have repeatedly said, as you heard last week—or the Home Affairs Committee heard last week—that there was no need for a further criminal investigation. So I think that everyone involved in 2007 would say now that mistakes were made. But I hope that you feel that we have responded appropriately and responsibly since we saw the information in 2010. Q559 DAVIES: So when you read the report did that make you think, "Well blow me, there are some things that don't stack up. We might not have any evidence, I might not know anything about these people, but there is clearly something that is not quite right here"? Did that prompt any activity on your part as chief executive of News International to say, "Well, you know, let's go back over this because there is something not right here"? REBEKAH: Everyone at News International has great respect for Parliament and for this Committee. Of course, to be criticised by your report was something that we responded to. We looked at the report. It was only when we had the information in December 2010 that we did something about it. But I think you heard today from Rupert Murdoch, who said that this was, you know, the most humble day. We come before this Committee to try and explain, openly and honestly, what happened. Of course we were very unhappy with the criticisms that this Committee found against the company. We aspire daily to have a great company, and your criticisms were felt. Q560 DAVIES: Could you tell us how often you either spoke to or met the various Prime Ministers that there have been since you have been editor of News of the World, of The Sun, and chief executive of News International. How often would you speak to or meet Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and David Cameron respectively? REBEKAH: Gosh. On Prime Minister David Cameron, I read the other day that we had met 26 times. I don't know if that is absolutely correct. I can do my best to come back to you on an exact number. I am sure that it is correct if that is what the Prime Minister's office say. The fact is I have never been to Downing Street while David Cameron has been Prime Minister, yet under Prime Minister Gordon Brown and Prime Minister Tony Blair, I did regularly go to Downing Street. Q561 DAVIES: How regular is regular? REBEKAH: On Prime Minister Gordon Brown, in the time that he was in Downing Street and also while he was Chancellor, I would have gone maybe six times a year. Q562 DAVIES: And with Tony Blair, something similar? REBEKAH: Probably similar. Maybe in the last few years a little more, but if you want the exact numbers I can do my best to get that. Strangely, it was under Labour Prime Ministers that I was a regular visitor to Downing Street and not the current Administration. Q563 DAVIES: Do you think that there was a change of emphasis when you were either editor of The Sun or chief executive of News International? It always struck me when I was growing up that The Sun and the News of the World—The Sun, in particular, always struck me as being a rather anti-establishment publication. It seemed to be the paper that was on the side of the little person fighting the establishment. Would you say that when you became editor—obviously with your relationship with those Prime Ministers — that there was a shift, and actually News International became part of the establishment, as opposed to being anti-establishment? REBEKAH: Well, considering the amount of complaints I used to get from both Prime Ministers about the coverage in The Sun I would think that if they were here now they would say that that is not the case. Throughout my editorship of The Sun, as you know, one of the main campaigns that we have had is for "Help for Heroes". I think The Sun is absolutely the paper for the military, and that caused us to have very, very uncomfortable conversations, particularly with Prime Minister Gordon Brown. One of the issues that still is apparent today, as it was back then, is the lack of awareness of other aspects of the media and of Parliament to acknowledge that currently we have soldiers fighting a war in Afghanistan, and people seem to forget that. I would not say that any Prime Minister would think that The Sun was not fighting for the right people. In fact, The Sun continues to fight for the right people. Q564 DAVIES: How often would any of those Prime Ministers ask you—if ever—as either editor or chief executive, not to publish a story? Would they know that something was coming in the news and would they ask you to spike a story? Would that happen? REBEKAH: I can't remember an occasion where Prime Ministers asked us to not run a story. Q565 DAVIES: Or politicians generally? Is that something that would happen? REBEKAH: No. I would say that I can remember many occasions when a Cabinet Minister, a politician, or a Prime Minister, was very unhappy at the stories we were running, but not that they have ever pleaded directly for one not to run. Q566 DAVIES: And if they had, you would not have been interested anyway, presumably? REBEKAH: As long as the story was true and accurate, or was part of a campaign, then no. There is no reason for a Prime Minister—that is exactly why we have a free press. Q567 DAVIES: This is my final question. There has been a feeling that, in some way, you had a close relationship with the current Prime Minister. The allegation goes—it seems to me that it is no different to your relationship with previous Prime Ministers, but just for the benefit of what people may perceive—that you had a close relationship with the Prime Minister, which was helpful to him, and certainly News International's support was helpful to him politically, but that in return News Corporation was hoping that that would in some way grease the wheels for the takeover of BSkyB. Was any of that part of the wider strategy of News Corporation? Were you encouraged to get closer to the Prime Ministers with that in mind? REBEKAH: No, not at all. I have read many, many allegations about my current relationship with the Prime Minister, with David Cameron, including my extensive horse riding with him every weekend up in Oxfordshire. I have never been horse riding with the Prime Minister. I don't know where that story came from. I was asked three days ago to disclose the racehorse that I owned with the Prime Minister, which I do not, and I was asked a week ago to explain why I owned some land with the Prime Minister, which I do not. I am afraid, in this current climate, many of the allegations that are put forward I am trying to answer honestly, but there is a lot out there that just isn't true, and particularly around this subject of my relationship with David Cameron. The truth is that he is a neighbour and a friend, but I deem the relationship to be wholly appropriate, and at no time have I ever had any conversation with the Prime Minister that you in the room would disapprove of.